Tea Party Aims to Apply Its Touch to the Senate GOP - We need 61 GOP Senators

I see what you're saying but how did that hurt the GOP? Seems that it helped them. If anything, that would've harmed the tea party. I'm not sure
how much deception occurred considering they ran as Republicans in the first place.

So you have not bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises? That is the part that hurts.

I just had to say this,
As a Canadian, Eurisko2012 is kind of what people outside of the US think of as a typical American...

Not that that is necessarily true, just they are louder I guess.

As for the OP, I am fearful of the Tea Party gaining too much influence in the US, because their followers are so radical, and they believe so
vehemently in the ideals "portrayed" by the party, that they don't question it.
All one has to do is look up voting records and you can see where the politicians counter their Mission Statement.

As for Mitt Romney, the only way he can cut the unemployment rate to 4% is to pad the numbers.

Flaws with Unemployment Calculations There are multiple reasons why unemployment calculations are not completely accurate:

The number of people left out of the work force is staggering. Millions of people have recently left the work force. The number of unemployed
Americans would be more than a third higher if these people were included, which would in turn significantly increase the unemployment rate.
Statistics also don’t reflect the number of recent grads who have declared themselves not looking for work.

The household survey uses a limited sample size. Although 60,000 households may seem like a lot, it is hardly representative of the 115 million or so
that exist in the United States. It is difficult to know how well these 60,000 households represent the country as a whole. Many factors go into the
determination of who is unemployed, such as education, ethnicity, and geography (which can vary state to state, city to city, or even street to
street). If a particular group was overrepresented or underrepresented, the figure can be strongly biased.

Many people are included as employed when they don’t earn a livable income. Just because someone is classified as employed doesn’t mean they can
survive off their income. They are the “under-employed” and are not represented in the federal unemployment rate. I have a friend whose employer
only gives her work four days every two weeks, so she still has to live with her parents. Although she is technically employed, she cannot make ends
meet with her part-time job. Furthermore, some are considered self-employed, but their business doesn’t earn substantial income. Many other jobs,
such as farm workers or tourist companies, offer seasonal employment, so someone classified as employed may only work for a couple of months.

The business survey double counts people who have multiple jobs. If you work on a fryline at KFC, do auto body work, and help out with a landscaping
company, you will add three jobs to the survey. In other words, your part-time job may end up “counting” for someone who is actually unemployed.
This makes it difficult to know how many people really have jobs, especially in times when many must find a second job just to get by. Overlap can
cause confusion. Some people fall into a couple of unemployment situations. For example, students are normally left out of the work force. However, if
a high school student starts looking for a job, they become part of the work force and are classified as unemployed until they find one. People are
also counted as employed if they just lost their job, but worked during the week of reference the statistician was using.

People are classified as employed as long as they “technically” still have a job. Often, someone is placed on temporary leave due to a variety of
issues, but it’s clear they are at risk of losing their job permanently. Others have to leave for medical reasons, but may not be able to return to
work. These people may know they won’t go back to work again, but until their employment status is sorted out, they are classified as
employed.

reply to post by MrSpad
Frankly, it didn't seem that way the morning after the mid-terms

Originally posted by glasshouse reply to post by nunyadammm
I see what you're saying but how did that hurt the GOP? Seems that it helped them. If anything, that would've harmed the tea party. I'm not sure
how much deception occurred considering they ran as Republicans in the first place.

So you have not bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises? That is the part that hurts.

I don't think you really get what I'm saying.
If tea party candidates run as anti-establishment and then,once elected, go along with the establishment,
how does that hurt the establishment? It just adds to their ranks.
It hurts the group that the politician used as a spring board.
I also stated that, if all of the above happened, how surprised can you honestly be? I mean, a registered Republican acting like a Republican?
Get my drift?
What did I say in my statement that would suggest I haven't "bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises?"
What did I say in my statement that would suggest I voted for any tea party candidates.
You're reading comprehension is lacking, your condescension is not and "that is the part that hurts."

Originally posted by glasshouse
I don't think you really get what I'm saying.
If tea party candidates run as anti-establishment and then,once elected, go along with the establishment,
how does that hurt the establishment? It just adds to their ranks.

What did it add to their ranks? Politicians that turned on all of their promises and defied the people that put them in office. All of this is under
the Republican banner because you know, there is no actual Tea PARTY. Look around, check the polls. It is hurting Republicans.

It hurts the group that the politician used as a spring board.

I would agree if I thought that group ever actually existed but it was always just a new name for Republicans.

I also stated that, if all of the above happened, how surprised can you honestly be? I mean, a registered Republican acting like a Republican?
Get my drift?

I am not surprised at all. I am not the one feeling betrayed by them either. It is the Teabaggers that voted for them that got the surprise.

What did I say in my statement that would suggest I haven't "bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises?"

All those words.

What did I say in my statement that would suggest I voted for any tea party candidates.

Not sure I ever said you did.

You're reading comprehension is lacking, your condescension is not and "that is the part that hurts."

It added to their ranks people that would vote the way they wanted them to. Doesn't seem too complicated

All of this is under the Republican banner because you know, there is no actual Tea PARTY.

Um, yeah. I thought I was pretty clear about that too

I am not surprised at all. I am not the one feeling betrayed by them either. It is the Teabaggers that voted for them that got the surprise.

OK cool. Neither one of us is surprised. Are you insinuating I'm one of these "teabaggers"?

What did I say in my statement that would suggest I haven't "bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises?"

All those words.

All of 'em huh?

What did I say in my statement that would suggest I voted for any tea party candidates.

Not sure I ever said you did.

It seemed implied when you rhetorically asked me:

So you have not bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises? That is the part that hurts.

Basically, what I got from that was, in your mind I'm some idiot that supported and voted for a tea party candidate
but is just too lazy to do my homework and make sure "my candidate" is holding true to his word. The fact that it "hurts" you so much is because
you think my level of idiocy and apathy is just so darn sad.

OH, a weak personal attack. Good way to open a dialogue.

Actually, this is how I opened the dialogue:

I see what you're saying but how did that hurt the GOP? Seems that it helped them. If anything, that would've harmed the tea party. I'm not sure
how much deception occurred considering they ran as Republicans in the first place.

I thought it was pretty respectful. I politely asked an honest question to gain a different perspective.
And... this is your reply:

So you have not bothered to see if they have lived up to their teabagger promises? That is the part that hurts.

I think I've already covered this but I'll do it one more time.
You seem to think you "know" me all of a sudden. And what you "know" of me is that I'm intellectually lazy.
To me that's condescending. So when I replied rudely that wasn't to "open a dialogue". It was to end one.

Very nice to read an informed and educated post instead of all the ignorant and childish repetition of talking points (of either party). My bet is
only maybe 1% of people, including American ATS members, understand your point about why corporations are sitting on all their cash (or doling it out
to their execs via massive bonuses). When corporate taxes were higher and had less loopholes, companies indeed re-invested revenues into capital
purchases to avoid tax hits.

The only thing missing though is the simple fact that the wealthy NEVER, EVER create or created jobs or ever will. Only demand bolstered by consumers
actually having money to spend creates jobs as companies ramp up production to meet demand. But now, in the global economy all big companies have no
country allegiance and are instead like little countries unto themselves with employees and consumers around the world. In this world, only profit
matters and if that profit can be made entirely overseas, a company does not have to care about the wealth of the middle class -- their do not need
Americans money to stay profitable.

Originally posted by KingAtlas
I just had to say this,
As a Canadian, Eurisko2012 is kind of what people outside of the US think of as a typical American...

Not that that is necessarily true, just they are louder I guess.

As for the OP, I am fearful of the Tea Party gaining too much influence in the US, because their followers are so radical, and they believe so
vehemently in the ideals "portrayed" by the party, that they don't question it.
All one has to do is look up voting records and you can see where the politicians counter their Mission Statement.

As for Mitt Romney, the only way he can cut the unemployment rate to 4% is to pad the numbers.

I find your reasoning to be bizarre.

You act like it has never been done before.

I think we live in a society full of chronic amnesiacs.

"the only way Romney can cut the unemployment rate to 4% is to pad the numbers."

American Exceptionalism has handed us a 4% unemployment rate many times.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
The Tea Party is all about - F R E E D O M -.

Also, the Keystone Pipeline will come in handy if we have a crisis in the middle east.

-----------
The pipes are there. Time to hire some welders. Why are you denying them work?

How is it about freedom when you are advocating the government stealing people's private land and giving it to corporate interests. Any TEA bagger
that tells me he is for freedom and then tries to give my land is going to get a lesson in freedom real fast.

-----------

The Tea Party is showing the necessary leadership.

Our mission is clear.

We will bring back American prosperity.

We can't stay on food stamps forever. Our children deserve better than that.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.